July 2011 - Aur-general - lists.archlinux.org

[aur-general] duplicated packages
by Miguel Aguilar Molina 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

Hello I accidentally duplicated a package in the repository: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50620 Might be removed from AUR? Thanks

2 1

[aur-general] grub-legacy-fedora-git package
by KESHAV P.R. 10 Jul '11

10 Jul '11

Hi all, I have created a PKGBUILD for Fedora's GRUB Legacy fork, grub-legacy-fedora-git https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47959 . It includes support for GPT boot (not tested) and supports ext4 /boot (tested using the UEFI package). It does not include any of the patches used in core/grub package. It compiles fine with the binutils in Arch repos (unlike the current core/grub and aur/grub-gfx packages). It also supports splashimage (gfx) option. Although I maintain that package, I do not use it. I use grub2-bios-bzr which I maintain). Important info :- 1. The menu config file is /boot/grub/grub.conf, not /boot/grub/menu.lst . 2. The syntax for splashimage is (for example) - splashimage (hd0,0)/boot/grub/image.xpm.gz 3. The package builds fine in x86_64 with gcc-multilib. I have not checked whether it compiles without gcc-multilib (grub2 1.99 compiles without multilib in x86_64). Would be helpful if someone confirms whether it compiles in x86_64 without multilib. I request current core/grub and aur/grub-gfx users to test this package and give your comments/suggestions. Regards. Keshav PS: The equivalent UEFI package is grub-legacy-efi-fedora https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=47979 .

1 0

[aur-general] Deletion request
by Seblu 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

Package: ntpdate Reason: Already in ntp Link: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=19145 -- Sébastien Luttringer www.seblu.net

4 8

[aur-general] package for the gui of mkvmerge from mkvtoolnix (mmg)
by Uli Armbruster 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

Hi guys Since the PKGBUILD of mkvtoolnix now has the additional option --disable-gui, I want to create a package in the AUR which provides this gui, which is called mmg (MkvMergeGui). Right now I have it up here https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=49992 but I'm not sure about some things: - Is it good or bad to only provide mmg (and its manpage, desktop file and icons of course) in the package and add mkvtoolnix as a dependency, because mmg depends on mkvmerge (which is in mkvtoolnix)? You see in the comments, that others want me to make a package, which provides all the mkvtoolnix package contains PLUS mmg => they want a package which is exactly like that one which has been in the repos until recently. In my opinion it makes more sense to make this package depending on mkvtoolnix, for some reasons: - People don't have to compile everything, the build process is faster and packages depending on mkvtoolnix remain dependent on an official package, which is always recommended in my opinion. - It's possible to install the gui for mkvmerge AND / OR the gui for mkvinfo (which I want to upload to the AUR as well later today or tomorrow). If I provide everything in that package, that's not possible, except of course if I create 3 packages, one which includes the one gui, one which includes the other gui and one which includes both guis (the fourth possibility, no gui, is already in the repos). So the way I want to do it makes more sense, right? - I'm struggling with the naming of the package. Right now I called it mkvtoolnix-gtk, because for some reason I thought, that in mkvtoolnix's source there's one gtk gui for mkvmerge and a qt gui for mkvmerge. But that's wrong, there's the gtk gui for mkvmerge and a qt gui for mkvinfo. So right now I'd say, I name mkvmerge's gui mkvmerge-gui or mmg and mkvinfo's gui mkvinfo-gui or whatever the executable is called. I think that makes more sense. Do you agree? So what I'm asking is, what would you recommend? I'd like to make the package(s) as good as possible for all Arch users, not just for me. So if my approach makes no sense to you guys, I'll bow to the majority and change it (or let someone else take care of it ;D ) Cheers Army

5 7

[aur-general] [deletion request] streetview-explorer
by Uli Armbruster 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

And another one: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=49968 There's a package called streetview-explorer-svn which fits better, because this application is only provided as a svn version, so my package (which indicated to be a stable release according to the name, but there won't be a stable release ever according to the developer) isn't needed in the AUR. Regards Army

2 1

[aur-general] [removal request] luakit-noscript-git
by Uli Armbruster 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

Please remove my package luakit-noscript-git. It was merged into the develop branch which is used in the package luakit-git. I only created this package to make it easier for users to test this plugin. You can find it here https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=50387

2 1

[aur-general] removal of python3-pyopengl
by Michael Schubert 09 Jul '11

09 Jul '11

Hi TUs, please remove python3-pyopengl [1]. It is out of date, orphaned, and I maintain the proper package python-pyopengl. Thanks. Michael [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=45322

2 1

[aur-general] delete SFML 1.6 packages
by Joao Cordeiro 08 Jul '11

08 Jul '11

Hi, All the SFML 1.6 packages are broken and orphaned. The official package is the git version. I think they could all be delete. sfml1 https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=49606 lib32-sfml https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=42518 mingw32-sfml https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38509 Cheers.

2 1

[aur-general] Orphan request: eclipse-java
by Vitaliy Berdinskikh 07 Jul '11

07 Jul '11

Hi all! [eclipse-java][] was marked as out of date in February. Fgrano adopts it in April but doesn't update the package. Now we have new Eclipse - Indigo. I wrote to Fgrano on 30 June - no answer. [eclipse-java]: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18064 -- Regards, Vitaliy Berdinskikh

2 3

[aur-general] Deletion Request
by Nathan Hulse 07 Jul '11

07 Jul '11

Hello there, I would like to request deletion of the compiz-*-09 packages on the AUR, as suggested by wonder. They are out-of-date and pretty much redundant as the compiz-*-++ packages fulfill the same purpose. http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38958 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38959 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38960 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38961 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38962 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38963 http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=38964 I have made an alternate set of packages available using a more generic -dev suffix. These install the current release from the development branch as a normal installation, rather than a test install, differentiating them from the "compiz++" packages. I've added installation routines here and there to smooth out some rough edges. Regards, Nathan

2 1